If only Hutton had backed our troops sooner

In an impassioned plea for proper support for our forces in Afghanistan, former Defence Secretary John Hutton says the mood of the troops on the ground is 'unequivocal'.

They urgently need more helicopters, more soldiers and better protection from roadside bombs.

The Mail couldn't agree more. While our troops remain in battle, the Government is morally obliged to give them all the equipment and manpower they need to avoid needless casualties.

So full marks to Mr Hutton for speaking out. But doesn't he have some searching questions of his own to answer?

This is the man, remember, who resigned as Defence Secretary during the Pygmies' Revolt last month, citing unexplained 'family reasons' for standing down after only eight months in the job.

If he cared so passionately about our troops, shouldn't he have put them before his family and remained in government to fight for their cause - instead of forcing Gordon Brown to appoint a fifth Defence Secretary in only four years?

Meanwhile, can he explain precisely what - if anything - he himself did, during his short tenure, to address the critical shortage of helicopters and adequately armoured vehicles in Afghanistan?

It's all very well for politicians to spout fine words about their concern for our troops after they've left the government.

Wouldn't it do far more good if they demonstrated that commitment by their actions in office - instead of appearing to devote most of their energies to plotting their next career moves?

One final question for Mr Hutton: Where would it leave national security if our heroic front-line soldiers were allowed to abandon their posts for 'family reasons'?

No sacred cows

Under pressure: NHS

An alarming report today highlights the huge cost to the country of the pledge by both Labour and the Tories to protect NHS spending from the cuts that we all know must come.

Two authoritative bodies, the Institute for Fiscal Studies and the King's Fund medical charity, find that massive tax rises - or cuts in other departments of up to 16 per cent - will be needed if health spending is to be spared the axe.

Yes, everybody understands the enormous pressures on the NHS of our ageing population and increasing costs of modern treatments.

But we all know, too, that huge bureaucratic inefficiencies have been allowed to develop in our healthcare system, as in every other part of the public sector (where, we learn today, employees are taking 50 per cent more sick-leave than in private companies).

In its desperation to cling to power, the Government shut its eyes to reality long ago.

But what sense does it make for the Tories to echo Labour's pledge on health spending, before they've examined the scope for cuts in the NHS bureaucracy?

Even harder to understand is David Cameron's promise to ring-fence overseas aid - under which, absurdly, UK taxpayers subsidise economies such as China's.